If a ban on fur, or animal hair were to take place, It would only be logical to also ban leather. As both are taken from animals and both are essentially the same when it comes to an animals life.
The use of an animals fur or the extracting of an animals hide to make a leather good are equivalent when the life of an animal is at stake.
In the use of either a fur or leather, an animals life is taken. The result of obtaining the good, whether it be fur or leather is irrelevant, as the main concern is an animals life is lost so the production of the good can take place.
Legitimately I don't think we should ban fur and banning leather would cause massive implications that the world seriously isn't ready for. If you did ban leather that would simply mean a huge portion of wasted resources when it comes to the slaughter of animals for food. It would also mean a huge change for products we use everyday. This off all the places where leather is found, there's a lot.
No, I don't think we should. There are different issue with fur and leather. Fur mostly comes from animals who are bred purely for their skin, they are killed and everything else is wasted. Leather is more a by product of the meat industry, and if we banned leather, these animals would still die and their skins would be wasted.
If we ban fur, we should not ban leather too. Animals have been hunted for decades now and why should we not use every bit of the animal that we can instead of letting it go to waste? I understand the position people take when they want to ban fur though.
Banning fur does not logically lead to banning leather. Leather is most often a by product of killing cows for meat, whereas animals killed for fur are being killed entirely for their pelts. Leather is incredibly useful and necessary for many things, whereas fur is largely a fashion accessory that is not needed.